The "Art" of Country Music...?

            Perhaps this post is "ill-timed" in that I don't plan to put out my "country album" for some time yet, perhaps years, if at all. But the subject has been on my mind lately. I feel like I want to dig into it and get it all out in the open.

             The last year or so I have been exposed to a LOT of country music due to circumstances all but beyond my control. To be more precise, my wife is an incurable country music fan, and the circumstances we've been in lately have made country music and videos available for consumption virtually anytime, with the inevitable result. If you're married you'll probably understand.

           My last comments concerning that style of music (if you dig back in my blogs) were about the state of country radio back in the 1980s. My general opinion was that country music was "80% throwaway" material and only a small portion of any value. I feel this needs further explanation, not to mention updating because of the changes to the genre in the last 30 years or so.
         Firstly, in some sense I stand by the "80%" assessment, but it must be understood that I was relating it to music as a whole. Or to be exact "music as art". But this isn't entirely fair, because country music fans don't use this scale of judgement as I do, which I'll explain shortly.
       Secondly, having gained a sense of this "different scale of judgment", I now have a better affection for some of the tunes I was inclined to dismiss as "not being artful". In fact, similar to some old rock'n'roll tunes, they can even bring a tear to the eye being deeply connected to a particular time in one's life despite not being "great art".

        I believe the root of this "different scale" for country tunes is the result of a difference in character of what Country is all about. At it's heart, country was ever only marginally connected to "the art of music". What it is mainly about, is "the art of story-telling", set to music.
      Any country artist or fan could tell you that, but it was hard for me to see because of my musical perspective.You see, music is a very unique art. It's such a great medium for human experience, especially songwriting: the music evokes/imitates human emotion, while the lyrics express human thought. At their best, they work together to create something larger than either poetry or instrumental music alone. Something transcendent. So when viewed this way and new to C&W, one must ask oneself, "what in the heck is the point of this stuff?"
      Add to this, in most music, there has always been a division between "consumer music" and "art".
This could be the subject of a very long treatise, but to keep it simple I'll just make a passing reference to the Beatles. I recall some critic or critics saying that until "Sgt. Pepper", they were just making "dance music". From "Pepper" on, it was art.

       My point is that most country music is consumer music. It's story-telling for cash. This leads one to deal with it harshly in terms of art. But as I always say, the definition of art is a very personal thing. The scale to measure it on is "what has meaning for you?" And country music (aside from the "drinkin' an' dancin'" tunes), has a lot of meaning for a lot of people.
       Modern country is far different from what it once was. Unless you know the tunes, it's very difficult to tell if you are on a country, pop or rock station anymore, they sound so similar. Even steel guitar isn't the give-away it once was, as many country tunes cross over onto pop stations.
       Being now very familiar with the play rosters and the artists, I have to say I have heard a respectable number of tunes these days that, for me, easily make it into the category of Art with a capital "A". Country is not necessarily something to be ashamed of anymore. Looked at from it's own perspective, it often never was.